Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

RNC Targets Debate; Paul Ryan on Possible White House Ambitions; Conflict in Syria. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired October 30, 2015 - 15:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[15:00:02]

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: But the specific mission of these U.S. troops, is at this, stage murky at best.

We just heard a fiery exchange between White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest and our own White House correspondent, Jim Acosta, about whether this constitutes a combat mission.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIM ACOSTA, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: The question that the American people have, which is, this president, this White House, the officials here at this White House repeatedly over and over again made it clear to the American people that there would be no combat role for U.S. troops fighting ISIS.

That appears to be changing. Not only is there this announcement that you're talking about today, which you say they won't be involved in a combat role, but you're not ruling out the possibility that they may be involved in some sort of combat operation. But on the Iraq side, you have Pentagon officials this week saying we're in combat.

So I'm just -- it would be great if we could just have a moment of clarity here and you could acknowledge that, yes, this mission is changing. It's not what it was said it was going to be at the onset of this.

(CROSSTALK)

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: To say that it's clear, to say that, Jim, would only confuse the situation.

The fact of the matter is the mission that the commander in chief has given our personnel in Iraq and now in Syria is a train, advise and assist mission. And we have gone to great lengths to make clear that that is -- in no way diminishes the amount of risk that our men and women in uniform will be facing.

We have also been quite clear that there actually have been situations where combat boots have been on the ground inside of Syria. We have been quite candid about that. The president ordered a mission involving U.S. military personnel putting boots on the ground inside of Syria to try to rescue American hostages who had been taken by ISIL. That occurred more than a year ago. (END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: That happened just a little bit ago here. Also to be clear, the rebels these American troops will be helping are the same people who will now not only be fighting ISIS terrorists, but also fighting Syria's regime forces and their ally, the heavily armed Russians.

All of this a major turnaround from the assurances we have heard thus far from President Obama really ever since 2013.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I do not foresee a scenario in which boots on the ground in Syria, American boots on the ground in Syria would not only be good for America, but also would be good for Syria.

I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan.

With respect to the situation on the ground in Syria, we will not be placing U.S. ground troops to try to control the areas that are part of the conflict inside of Syria.

The resolution we submitted today does not call for the deployment of U.S. ground combat forces to Iraq or Syria.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Joining me now, our senior international correspondents, both Clarissa Ward and Nick Paton Walsh.

So, Nick, let me just go to you first.

Who exactly is going? Where will they be going in Syria? What kind of environment will these American special forces be walking into?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Under 50 special forces, we understand, in that advise and assist mission, but it will most likely be around the area we think around Kobani.

That's most likely -- that city fought over and cleared out of ISIS late last year -- because I think much of the prong of this first part of the mission is aiming towards the ISIS stronghold of Raqqa. That's where there are some Syrian-Arab coalition forces along with a lot of Kurds as well who are doing the majority of fighting there.

Who are they going to assist? Well, I have to say, that is still a little bit fuzzy here. Yes, they say this Syrian-Arab coalition. We do know there are a number of comparatively moderate groups who make that up, but they are not particularly big and they're not particularly powerful they're and not really that often in the fight too.

So there will be a lot, I imagine, of extra equipment and backing up with aircraft, airstrikes for these moderates if the special forces get traction with them and be able to work this out properly. But that doesn't translate into a sudden force overnight. Much of the fighting probably will be done by the Kurds. That's complicated for America's key ally, the Turkish, who are very suspicious of the Kurds.

And it isn't exactly what America has always been wanting to do here, which is create a moderate Syrian Sunni force in Northern Syria to take on ISIS and then see what happens, whether they decided to move and fight the regime later on, leaving that question perhaps to the distant future -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: So you perfectly laid out what's at play here for these Americans.

Clarissa, to you. I know you were just in Syria. You were embedded for multiple days. Not only did you talk to fighters, you actually spoke with ISIS militants, and they told you -- correct me, but they told you essentially U.S. troops, bring it on. They want Americans on the ground. Why?

CLARISSA WARD, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brooke, it's a conversation I have been having with various ISIS militants who I speak to for awhile now.

[15:05:00]

And it's always struck me as quite curious that they have said they would welcome U.S. troops on the ground. I think, first of all, you have to see this as bluster and bravado above anything else and propaganda. But beyond that, I do think they have a sense that a visible presence of U.S. troops on the ground in Syria would be very polarizing and perhaps they are hoping that they can capitalize on that, that perhaps it will push some other Islamist groups that have up until this point been fighting against ISIS into the arms of ISIS.

But, at this stage, we're not really talking about a visible presence on the ground. We're talking about a few dozen advisers who will be training, who will be assisting. And what's interesting on that front, Brooke, is that the fighters we spent time with on the ground told us that what they really need in order to push into ISIS strongholds like Raqqa is more weaponry, heavier weaponry, armor- piercing weapons.

And there is still a big question mark as to whether this enhanced U.S. role will also come in the form of heavier U.S. weapons.

BALDWIN: Clarissa Ward, thank you both so much. You would know, having been over there, understanding the questions they're asking. Nick Paton Walsh, thank you so much as well.

Christopher Hill, let me bring you in, former ambassador to Iraq and dean at the University of Denver, also the author of "Outpost: A Diplomat at Work."

Mr. Ambassador, thank you so much for coming back. Welcome back.

CHRISTOPHER HILL, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO IRAQ: Pleasure. BALDWIN: You just heard my conversation. You know the news. Your

reaction to this?

HILL: Well, first of all, it's obviously a very big step, and especially in light of the clips that you had having our president saying he won't put boots on the ground, because these are boots on the ground.

Now, without parsing it too much, I would say the difference in numbers is a difference in substance. We're talking only about 50 people. These are not battle formations. So it's not quite the same as sending several units in there.

And I think the president is being very clear that the United States will not be doing the fighting. That said, I think these U.S. individuals, if I can say, can be very helpful in terms of helping to shape the battlefield and perhaps in a moment where we think it might be right to start pushing ISIS back again.

So I don't think it's bad strategy. The problem is that I think the president is going to have to explain how he said he will never do this and now he's doing this. And as for what's going on, on the ground, I would encourage people to understand that what's going on in Syria is on the one hand a battle with ISIS, but it really hasn't been a Damascus vs. ISIS.

Damascus has its hands full with various other Sunni militias groups in the other parts of Syria. What this is, is a sort of battle out in the desert involving Kurds, involving some Sunni Arabs, to be sure, but especially involving ISIS.

So, so far, this is not part and parcel of what we have come to understand as a Syrian sectarian civil war. I think the big news in that regard of course is what has been going on in Vienna.

BALDWIN: I want to hear you out there. Let me go back to your first point, Mr. Ambassador, because I had on not only a lieutenant colonel, but also a Navy SEAL, both of whom who said, yes, this is advise and assist, but this is -- I don't want to parse too much either -- but this is a combat role.

We saw what happened, for example, in Northern Iraq with rescuing the hostages. We heard from the SecDef essentially saying it was an advise and assist. Firefight happened. They breached the compound. They got involved. Those were combat -- that was certainly a combat role. So this would be combat. I just want to hear that from you.

HILL: I certainly agree with that, the point being that if you're going to successfully advise and successfully assist, you essentially have to go along with these indigenous forces on the ground.

I don't think it's really a proposition where we can stay back and they come back after a day and we say, how did it go? I think you're absolutely right. Americans will very much be in harm's way.

BALDWIN: If we're just talking several dozen, and I know these are the mightiest of the mighty, these Americans who we will be sending over, but we know, as we just heard from Clarissa, as we have heard from Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, Raqqa is one of the goals, the three R's from the other day, Raqqa, Ramadi, raids.

With Raqqa, if you have several dozen advisers and Kurds, can you really take this ISIS stronghold?

HILL: Well, I think they don't have what they need to take it at this point. But I suspect that part of a mission of the U.S. operators will be to try to encourage much better cooperation between the Kurds and the Sunni Arabs in place.

So I think you might see a real effort to try to get these forces because there are a lot of indigenous force there, get them to work together, get them to plan together and get them to attack ISIS together.

[15:10:03]

So I think the idea is that, by having these 50 Americans, they will be kind of a force multiplier with respect to the indigenous forces. Look, it's a high-risk business, but we really cannot see what is going on the ground by being in the air. We have to have some people on the ground and so I think that's the inspiration behind it.

BALDWIN: All right, Ambassador Chris Hill, thank you. Thank you so much.

Coming up next, breaking in the world of politics, the RNC, Republican National Committee, officially suspending its next debate with NBC amid the criticism over the CNBC debate just a couple nights ago. Hear why. And we have NBC. They're responding as well.

Plus, did taking the speakership kill Paul Ryan's chances of ever running for president? His surprising answer just in from a brand-new CNN interview with Dana Bash there.

And Mets fans, you remember this guy, the New Yorker who parachuted into Shea Stadium? This was during the 1986 World Series. Well, ahead of tonight's game three, the first tonight here in New York, he will join me live. Wait until you hear what he remembers about that night. Don't miss this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:15:38]

BALDWIN: All right, some breaking news on the political front, the fallout from this past's Wednesday CNBC has now spread to the network's mother ship, NBC.

The RNC, the Republican National Committee, saying it is now suspending its partnership with NBC and will not let ABC air the Republican debate this upcoming February 26. A letter to the chairman of NBC News states why the RNC is pulling out. Let me quote part of this letter. It says this -- quote -- "The CNBC

network is one of your media properties and its handling of the debate was conducted in bad faith. We understand that NBC does not exercise full editorial control over CNBC's journalist approach. However, the network is in arm of your organization and we need to ensure there's not a repeat performance."

Joining me now, CNN political commentator Michael Smerconish, who also hosts CNN's "SMERCONISH" Saturday morning. Also with me, senior media correspondent, host of "RELIABLE SOURCES," Brian Stelter.

Stelter, just hot off the phone. Trying to not eavesdrop too much, but what is the deal with NBC right now?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Well, checking with the Republican National Committee, they say they haven't heard back from NBC yet. The ball is in NBC's court.

This is an attempt by the Republican National Committee, by Reince Priebus to take back control. Candidates are very upset. Campaigns are very accept about how it went with CNBC. Some of the blame has been apportioned on the Republican Party as a whole. So what we see from Priebus is an attempt to take back control, take some control away from NBC, get down to the table, have a conversation in the days or weeks to come and see if they can work it out.

I believe NBC and the RNC will work it out.

(CROSSTALK)

STELTER: But others are not so sure. Others are not so sure. The Republican Party is saying, we want to have a debate that day, and we will have a debate that day, whether NBC is there or not.

BALDWIN: What do you think?

MICHAEL SMERCONISH, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: The politics are brilliant for the GOP, because nobody wants to defend the media. The media ranks even lower than the Congress. Right?

BALDWIN: Right.

SMERCONISH: And from a political perspective, not an entertainment perspective, there are already too many debates. The RNC tried to rein in and did to a certain extent. There were far more debates in the last cycle.

They got out of control. They tried to rein this in. And, frankly, they are probably looking to Democrats and saying they have the right idea with a total of five or six. We never should have signed up for 10 to begin with.

STELTER: Well, listen, from my perspective, we'd like to have more debates, wouldn't we?

SMERCONISH: We would like to have 25. BALDWIN: Of course.

STELTER: And not just for television reasons, for ratings reasons, but also we will get more answers to more questions or more avoiding answers to questions.

At least we will have a chance to test these candidates, to probe these candidates. But that's not what they want. Right? They want to get up there. They want to deliver their talking points. They want to take their shots at each other and then get off the stage.

BALDWIN: This weekend, there's a big meeting of the minds.

SMERCONISH: Well, among the campaigns getting together, and initially the idea was that the RNC wouldn't be involved in that because the candidates are trying to rein in this whole process. They know they don't fare well when it's an extended timetable.

STELTER: The question now is, how many of those campaigns are actually going to show up on Sunday? Some are going to come to this meeting. Some might not go to this meeting because the Republican National Committee is trying to take things under control and call off this NBC debate.

There's a lot of I guess turmoil behind the scenes because that CNBC debate did not go well. Now what we're seeing is the fallout from it.

SMERCONISH: Can I make a point?

BALDWIN: Please.

SMERCONISH: I would not have asked questions the way that the CNBC panelists asked some of those questions, but I think anybody interested in this issue should take the time to Google the transcripts of all of the debates and see if there's really a discernible difference.

The FOX debate, which was the first of them, first question to Donald Trump, are you part of the war on women, after referencing how he had referenced fat pigs, dogs, and slobs. To Scott Walker, would you really let a mother die rather than have an abortion? To John Kasich, if you had a son or daughter who was gay or lesbian, how would you explain to them your opposition to same-sex marriage?

(CROSSTALK)

STELTER: These sound actually tougher -- in some ways, they sound tougher than CNBC's debate, I think.

SMERCONISH: It's like we're shocked to find there's gambling at Rick's cafe, a "Casablanca," reference, because of the way CNBC posed those questions. Again, the cartoonish question that John Harwood posed, not something I would have ever said, but not too different from the way FOX's debate...

BALDWIN: But these candidates are also very savvy in how they don't always answer the questions.

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: Now they have a built-in excuse. And you saw this on "NEW DAY" yesterday morning with Carly Fiorina, when Alisyn was asking what I thought was an entirely appropriate question about what she had said about Planned Parenthood.

And now the device is to say, I can't believe you're asking me that. That's a media bias question, which is a great deflector of legitimacy sometimes.

[15:20:01]

BALDWIN: Does it show that the outsiders in this race though have quite a bit of power?

STELTER: It absolutely does.

BALDWIN: Look at what is happening.

STELTER: Think about Donald Trump. Because of Donald Trump, so many more millions of viewers are watching these debates than had ever watched primary debates before.

As a result, the threat from a Donald Trump or a Ben Carson or a Ted Cruz not to come to a future debate has even more power than ever.

SMERCONISH: Right. But what are they seeing when they watch? We watch car wrecks as well. Right? We rubberneck.

I would maintain that the imprint for the GOP brand thus far is not one that helps when the dust settles and independents have to determine the outcome.

STELTER: You're thinking about this time next year.

SMERCONISH: Absolutely.

STELTER: When it's the general election season.

BALDWIN: Thinking ahead. Thinking ahead.

SMERCONISH: Hey, three steps.

BALDWIN: There we go.

While I have you, can we stop talking about the debate for a second, because I had -- I really want to get to this Chris Christie sound. I thought he had a pretty strong outing the other night. He's excellent at debates. It's a great spot for him.

But we know "The New York Times" wants him to drop out. There was an opinion piece the other day calling on him to do that and he responded. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. CHRIS CHRISTIE (R-NJ), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I got welcomed home today by "The New York Times."

"The New York Times" is in my gaggle every day for the last 13 years, seven years as U.S. attorney in New Jersey, and now six years as governor. You can imagine how pleasant it is, how great it is to have "The New York Times" cover you as a conservative Republican every day.

And today they picked a day to tell me that I need to drop out of the race for president.

CROWD: No!

CHRISTIE: Right. So here's the thing. I now know I am definitely going to be the next president of the United States.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

CHRISTIE: They wouldn't be asking me to drop out if they weren't worried sick over the fact that I might beat their candidate, Hillary Clinton.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: All right, so should he?

SMERCONISH: When he woke up this morning and someone said to him, or maybe last night I think is when it broke, said to him, hey, Governor, here's news. "The New York Times" is calling for your dismissal from the race. I'm sure he was ecstatic. In the context of what we have just discussed, nothing could be better...

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: Because we're talking about him.

SMERCONISH: Right. Either that or...

(CROSSTALK)

SMERCONISH: No, for "The Times" to be calling for it, no disrespect, because I know you used to be there, but it plays so well to the Republican base that "The New York Times" wants me out.

STELTER: Used to work there.

It does. It definitely does. Just remember that when these campaigns, when these candidates, Republican or Democrat, they are talking about the media, when they are talking about us, it's like wearing body armor. It deflects. Right? It deflects. Think about what they are not talking about when they're talking about media bias.

BALDWIN: Substance.

STELTER: Substance. BALDWIN: Dot, dot, dot.

STELTER: And issues that actually matter.

BALDWIN: Michael Smerconish, thank you two so much. Make sure you watch this guy 9:00 a.m. Saturdays, this guy at 11:00 a.m. Sundays, bada bing, bada boom. There you go, "SMERCONISH" and "RELIABLE SOURCES."

(CROSSTALK)

BALDWIN: Time now -- thank you, gentlemen, very much.

Time now to introduce you to another of this year's top 10 CNN Heroes.

And 10 years ago, Maggie Doyne left her hometown of Mendham, New Jersey, on a backpacking trip and stumbled onto an entirely new life in remote Nepal. She intended to help just one child, but today her foundation supports a home for 50 children in need and a school that educates hundreds more.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAGGIE DOYNE, CNN HERO: I always said I would stop after 25. And then the cap between 30. And then the cap between 40. And then that kid comes in that you just can't say no to, that it's life or death.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: That is just a piece of her story. We urge you to watch it. Just go to CNNHeroes.com. And while you are there, please read about all of our heroes, all 10 of our heroes for 2015. And then we want you to vote on your favorite as CNN Hero of the Year.

Coming up, Dana Bash one-on-one with the new speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, how this new role could impact his political ambitions in the future.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Do you think this means the end of the road for any hope of being president?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:28:23]

BALDWIN: Paul Ryan is serving his first full day as the newly elected speaker of the House, replacing John Boehner, and already talks are turning to his possible White House ambitions.

Speaker Ryan just sat down with CNN's chief political correspondent, Dana Bash.

And Dana joins me now.

Dana, congrats on the interview. What did he tell you?

BASH: Well, it was actually interesting, Brooke, because I spoke not only to Paul Ryan, the incoming, I guess now speaker, but John Boehner, the outgoing speaker.

It was pretty much the last thing he did before he left the building. And one thing that Boehner told me was that the way he convinced Ryan to run for speaker, because, as we know, he was very reluctant, he said no way at first, was to lay on the Catholic guilt. He told him that it was God's will to do that.

And so when I talked to Paul Ryan today, I asked him about that, but also whether this means he might not be president because it's very difficult to go, never mind from Congress to the White House. Barack Obama did it. But speaker of the House is a whole different ball game. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: Do you think this means the end of the road for any hope of being president?

REP. PAUL RYAN (R-WI), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: I don't know, hope of being president?

BASH: Meaning when you're speaker of the House, it's just -- it's a lot harder.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: That's OK with me. It doesn't really bother me.

I was -- if I really wanted to be president, I would have run in this cycle for the presidency. I had the chance and opportunity to do so. I chose not to do that. So, I'm perfectly happy and content with this decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: So, there, of course, was, just to sort of give the context here, a lot of talk about Paul Ryan at the beginning of this presidential cycle, whether he would jump in.

As he said, he made the decision not to.